Common sense gun regulations are not about taking guns away from everyone

[M14 Shooter]

Thank you for continuing to prove you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and proving they are both arbitrary and capricious.

It's like arguing why abortion rights are good or that global warming is man made. You ain't gonna listen.

Thank you for continuing to prove you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and proving they are both arbitrary and capricious.

You're welcome?

When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious, let us know.
I shan't hold my breath.

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

This is probably the biggest single factor in the cause of mass shootings:

Psychiatric Drugs and Violence: A Review of FDA Data Finds A Link

 

[ph3iron]

Of course.
It's only zero college con cultists who believe "leftists" say no one should be allowed

Magazine capacities apply to all people. "Assault" weapon bans apply to all people.

.

I don't understand and don't care.
Let people hunt.
I'm just amused about zero college people cowering in their basements waiting for the Muslims to attack

 

[ph3iron]

It's like arguing why abortion rights are good or that global warming is man made. You ain't gonna listen.

Thank you for continuing to prove you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and proving they are both arbitrary and capricious.

You're welcome?

When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious, let us know.
I shan't hold my breath.

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Aussie or uk regulations?
They are not pantywaists and actually have been through trench warfare

 

[sealybobo]

It's like arguing why abortion rights are good or that global warming is man made. You ain't gonna listen.

Thank you for continuing to prove you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and proving they are both arbitrary and capricious.

You're welcome?

When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious, let us know.
I shan't hold my breath.

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Broken record says what?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Thank you for continuing to prove you cannot present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and proving they are both arbitrary and capricious.

You're welcome?

When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious, let us know.
I shan't hold my breath.

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Broken record says what?

I understand you are embarrassed of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious - but there's nothing I can do about it.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I don't understand and don't care.
Let people hunt.
I'm just amused about zero college people cowering in their basements waiting for the Muslims to attack

Most people are more afraid of our own government than any foreign or domestic aggressor (and with good reason).

If we are ever faced with the reality of fighting our own government, it helps to at least be armed like a modern soldier, rather than a Continental.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Aussie or uk regulations?

Ask the Aussies what they think about that. Many of the brits are not too thrilled about their loss of inalienable rights.

.

 

[sealybobo]

You're welcome?

When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious, let us know.
I shan't hold my breath.

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Broken record says what?

I understand you are embarrassed of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious - but there's nothing I can do about it.

Except keep repeating the same old warn out line? Yes, I won't be your puppet or play your circular argument games.

How many times do you think you have said this? "When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious"

The necessity is the fact that nuts get their hands on high powered weapons.

You want to show that they work? When is the last time a person was shot by cop killer ammo? And I'm sorry but the bump stock law just kicked in a couple months ago.

Plus we need to put several more regulations on you for our way to be effective. We don't want to start with grabbing your guns so we will first start by banning bump stocks. People will be able to swallow that. Eventually you will be the next WACO you wacko.

 

[M14 Shooter]

When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious, let us know.
I shan't hold my breath.

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Broken record says what?

I understand you are embarrassed of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious - but there's nothing I can do about it.

Except keep repeating the same old warn out line? Yes, I won't be your puppet or play your circular argument games.

You mean you won't present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.
I know. It's because you know you can't.

 

[sealybobo]

You're welcome?

When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious, let us know.
I shan't hold my breath.

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Broken record says what?

I understand you are embarrassed of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious - but there's nothing I can do about it.

What is often overlooked are common sense actions that many advocates on both sides of this issue agree on. There are practical steps that both the public and gun owners recognize as necessary to keep firearms out of the hands of those who should not own or use them. Tulsi is working to increase school security, shore up and reform our mental healthcare system, close the gun show and online loopholes, ban military-style assault weapons and bump stocks, and require background checks on anyone seeking to purchase a gun. She has cosponsored legislation like the Gun Show Loophole Closing Act, the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Act, the Keeping Guns from High Risk Individuals Act, the Assault Weapons Ban, the Support Assault Firearms Elimination and Reduction for our Streets Act, the Domestic Violence Loophole Closure Act, the Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act, the Gun Violence Research Act, and more.

 

[sealybobo]

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Broken record says what?

I understand you are embarrassed of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious - but there's nothing I can do about it.

Except keep repeating the same old warn out line? Yes, I won't be your puppet or play your circular argument games.

You mean you won't present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.
I know. It's because you know you can't.

There are tough questions that must be answered about the shooter, including why many red flags that were raised about him previously did not prevent his ability to acquire an AR-15 and a high volume of ammunition. But we don’t have to wait for answers to these questions for Congress to pass legislation already supported by a majority of Americans, like universal background checks, closing the gun show loophole, and reinstating a federal ban on military-style assault weapons. The stakes are too high to allow partisan politics to get in the way of common sense change.” -Rep. Tulsi Gabbard

 

[Cosmos]

Never trust a Democrat when it comes to guns. None of them under any circumstances. They are lying to you. Don't give them an inch.

 

[sealybobo]

The 2018 midterm elections is evidence that the NRA’s clout may be waning. And as the tide turns in favor of gun safety reforms, Americans should welcome policymakers, gun owners, and leaders across the political spectrum reconsidering past opposition and shifting to support common sense gun safety reforms. If you are a public official who has evolved on this issue over time, here are three pieces of advice for how to talk about your changed view on guns.

1. Talk about your journey.
Some pundits and players in American politics are averse to elected officials changing stances, but on guns (as on so many issues), the path to meaningful progress hinges on building broad consensus and convincing those who may not have lent support initially. When explaining your evolution, it’s crucial to tell an honest story about why your views shifted. Be frank about what led you to where you are. A personal narrative about what made you reconsider your past stances will go a long way in thwarting “flip-flopping” attacks.

Invoke the shifting policy and political landscape.
While the past decade has seen a complete void of federal action on gun safety, states across the country (under both Republican and Democratic control) have taken up the mantle and brought about real change. Today, because of state actions, 33% of the U.S. population lives in a jurisdiction with expanded background checks, meaning that for nearly every firearm sale, whether at a gun show, at a gun shop, or through a private transaction, the seller must complete a background check.4 When asked about expanding this progress nationally, an eye-popping 97% of Americans say it should be the law of the land from coast to coast.

Make it clear what reforms do and don’t do.
In each and every state that has enacted gun safety reforms, the deeply American traditions of hunting and responsible firearms ownership continue unabated. Gun safety laws aren’t keeping firearms from law-abiding citizens who want to use them for protection or sport. Instead, they are ensuring that guns do not fall into the hands of those who shouldn’t have them, including domestic abusers, convicted violent felons, and those who are dangerously mentally ill.

Other proposals, like restrictions on magazine capacity, certain deadly, military-style weapons, or bump stocks aren’t keeping Americans from defending themselves in the states that have enacted them. They are keeping deadly weapons of war and accessories that make mass shootings more deadly off our streets. This is about taking reasonable, commonsense steps to reduce the violence that is plaguing our streets, classrooms, workplaces, and public venues.

 

[Cosmos]

Common sense gun regulations are not about taking guns away from everyone
NRA and supporters say common sense gun regulations are the government attempting to take guns away from law abiding citizens.
Bull Shit - it is an evil attempt to confuse logical arguments for gun control. Those who confuse the discussion with lies all have blood on their hands.

Let Me ask you something.

Why do you use a talking point that has been passed around?

You all use the phrase, "Common sense" in the exact same manner. Please don't insult yourself by trying to say that it is a natural progression of a phrase. No one was using it prior to last year.

If these truly were common sense regulations, you'd just make the case for the regulation and what it would do. There would be no need to even use the phrase.

My entire problem with people like you who use the phrase "common sense regulation" is that you are being deceitful and insulting. Deliberately so.

Why should anyone trust someone who is being dishonest and insulting in the same breath?

But here is some real common sense for you.

There are 20,000 laws and regulations already on the books and not one of them has stopped a single one of these tragedies. More will not do so, no matter how much people may want to wish it so.

So, it is 'common sense' that what hasn't worked in the past won't work now.

Wouldn't you say?

Democrats are expert at lying about what they really want to do. It used to be "gun control". Then it was "common-sense gun laws". Then it became "gun safety laws". They are liars. Everything a Democrat says about guns can be summed up with, "Repeal the 2nd Amendment and Confiscate all guns".

 

[sealybobo]

Never trust a Democrat when it comes to guns. None of them under any circumstances. They are lying to you. Don't give them an inch.

Hard to discuss honestly with someone who believes this way.

 

[sealybobo]

Common sense gun regulations are not about taking guns away from everyone
NRA and supporters say common sense gun regulations are the government attempting to take guns away from law abiding citizens.
Bull Shit - it is an evil attempt to confuse logical arguments for gun control. Those who confuse the discussion with lies all have blood on their hands.

Let Me ask you something.

Why do you use a talking point that has been passed around?

You all use the phrase, "Common sense" in the exact same manner. Please don't insult yourself by trying to say that it is a natural progression of a phrase. No one was using it prior to last year.

If these truly were common sense regulations, you'd just make the case for the regulation and what it would do. There would be no need to even use the phrase.

My entire problem with people like you who use the phrase "common sense regulation" is that you are being deceitful and insulting. Deliberately so.

Why should anyone trust someone who is being dishonest and insulting in the same breath?

But here is some real common sense for you.

There are 20,000 laws and regulations already on the books and not one of them has stopped a single one of these tragedies. More will not do so, no matter how much people may want to wish it so.

So, it is 'common sense' that what hasn't worked in the past won't work now.

Wouldn't you say?

Democrats are expert at lying about what they really want to do. It used to be "gun control". Then it was "common-sense gun laws". Then it became "gun safety laws". They are liars. Everything a Democrat says about guns can be summed up with, "Repeal the 2nd Amendment and Confiscate all guns".

For years Republicans said I was lying about them wanting to ban abortions and end social security. What are they trying to do today?

 

[Flopper]

Common sense gun regulations are not about taking guns away from everyone
NRA and supporters say common sense gun regulations are the government attempting to take guns away from law abiding citizens.
Bull Shit - it is an evil attempt to confuse logical arguments for gun control. Those who confuse the discussion with lies all have blood on their hands.

Opponent of all issues which separate the right and left are typically pictured as extremists. Why should gun control be any different?

 

[Cosmos]

Never trust a Democrat when it comes to guns. None of them under any circumstances. They are lying to you. Don't give them an inch.

Hard to discuss honestly with someone who believes this way.

Good. End of discussion then. Stop trying to take away the rights of millions of innocent law-abiding Americans. Support the 2nd Amendment. And go after the real criminals.

 

[M14 Shooter]

When you can present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious, let us know.
I shan't hold my breath.

No please hold your breath until I reply back. I'm writing something up right now. Hold it! Don't cheat.

I look forward to another demonstration of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Broken record says what?

I understand you are embarrassed of your inability to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious - but there's nothing I can do about it.

What is often overlooked are common sense actions that many advocates on both sides of this issue agree on. There are practical steps that both the public and gun owners recognize as necessary to keep firearms out of the hands of those who should not own or use them.

I accept your concession, that you are unable to present a sound argument for the necessity of the restrictions you seek, and show they are they are neither arbitrary nor capricious.

Nothing will prevent the acquisition of firearms by those who should not own or use them because laws cannot prevent people from doing things; this is especially true when the means of this supposed prevention consists -entirely- on restrictions on the law abiding.

...close the gun show and online loopholes,

These loopholes do not exist; anyone who discusses them speaks from either ignorance of dishonesty.
So... are you speaking from ignorance, or dishonesty?

...ban military-style assault weapons and bump stocks...

We have already determined you cannot soundly demonstrate the necessity of this.

and require background checks on anyone seeking to purchase a gun

You cannot soundly demonstrate the necessity of this.

...She has cosponsored legislation...

And?
She's an anti-gun loon who seeks to make it as difficult as possible for the law abiding to exercise their right to arms, and doesn't care if she has to walk all over the constitution to do it.